Some people have asked why review scores and not sales matter to developers. It's because reviews are instant. When I started I was making games for PS2 at the end of it's life cycle, so we didn't get reviews. The sales were all we had and when all the developer has is vgchartz for the first few months, you tend to not really know what's going on.
Publishers know that higher metacritic maps to higher sales. When sales don't match, feelings adjust to match reality, but it doesn't change the dependance on estimation using the scores. That's why publishers have bonus' in the contract based on reviews. It's an incentive to push the team cooked up by people that don't know how real motivation works.
@patrickklepek This is THE best opinion piece I have read in a long time. Developers and journalists have their own inner circle discussions about this stuff that tend to accomplish nothing. Everyone wants a solution to this and by opening up the dialogue you make progress more possible.
There's so much vitriol among developers about poor reviews of their games because nobody likes criticism and it's a hard pill for us to swallow. Internal studio culture leads us to believe we're more critical than anyone about our game and the mentality that the game is amazing can't help but permeate. We're blinded by that mindset that the changes we make improve the game because they've been argued and discussed to death.
Manveer says Mass Effect 3 is better than 2 in every way because in his mind they changed everything for the better, but we're all too close to our games to know which changes aren't.
Log in to comment